Body weight and composition endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 4 of the cachexia endpoints series.

Significant variation exists in the outcomes used in cancer cachexia trials, including measures of body composition, which are often selected as primary or secondary endpoints. To date, there has been no review of the most commonly selected measures or their potential sensitivity to detect changes resulting from the interventions being examined. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the frequency and diversity of body composition measures that have been used in cancer cachexia trials. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched between January 1990 and June 2021. Eligible trials examined adults (≥18 years) who had received an intervention aiming to treat or attenuate the effects of cancer cachexia for >14 days. Trials were also of a prospective controlled design and included body weight or at least one anthropometric, bioelectrical or radiological endpoint pertaining to body composition, irrespective of the modality of intervention (e.g., pharmacological, nutritional, physical exercise and behavioural) or comparator. Trials with a sample size of <40 patients were excluded. Data extraction used Covidence software, and reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. This review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO: CRD42022276710). A total of 84 clinical trials, comprising 13 016 patients, were eligible for inclusion. Non-small-cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer were studied most frequently. The majority of trial interventions were pharmacological (52%) or nutritional (34%) in nature. The most frequently reported endpoints were assessments of body weight (68 trials, n = 11 561) followed by bioimpedance analysis (BIA)-based estimates (23 trials, n = 3140). Sixteen trials (n = 3052) included dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-based endpoints, and computed tomography (CT) body composition was included in eight trials (n = 841). Discrepancies were evident when comparing the efficacy of interventions using BIA-based estimates of lean tissue mass against radiological assessment modalities. Body weight, BIA and DEXA-based endpoints have been most frequently used in cancer cachexia trials. Although the optimal endpoints cannot be determined from this review, body weight, alongside measurements from radiological body composition analysis, would seem appropriate. The choice of radiological modality is likely to be dependent on the trial setting, population and intervention in question. CT and magnetic resonance imaging, which have the ability to accurately discriminate tissue types, are likely to be more sensitive and provide greater detail. Endpoints are of particular importance when aligned with the intervention's mechanism of action and/or intended patient benefit.

Quality of life endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic review 3 of the cachexia endpoints series.

The use of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of quality of life (QOL) is common in cachexia trials. Patients' self-report on health, functioning, wellbeing, and perceptions of care, represent important measures of efficacy. This review describes the frequency, variety, and reporting of QOL endpoints used in cancer cachexia clinical trials. Electronic literature searches were performed in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane (1990-2023). Seven thousand four hundred thirty-five papers were retained for evaluation. Eligibility criteria included QOL as a study endpoint using validated measures, controlled design, adults (>18 years), ≥40 participants randomized, and intervention exceeding 2 weeks. The Covidence software was used for review procedures and data extractions. Four independent authors screened all records for consensus. Papers were screened by titles and abstracts, prior to full-text reading. PRISMA guidance for systematic reviews was followed. The protocol was prospectively registered via PROSPERO (CRD42022276710). Fifty papers focused on QOL. Twenty-four (48%) were double-blind randomized controlled trials. Sample sizes varied considerably (n = 42 to 469). Thirty-nine trials (78%) included multiple cancer types. Twenty-seven trials (54%) featured multimodal interventions with various drugs and dietary supplements, 11 (22%) used nutritional interventions alone and 12 (24%) used a single pharmacological intervention only. The median duration of the interventions was 12 weeks (4-96). The most frequent QOL measure was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (60%), followed by different FACIT questionnaires (34%). QOL was a primary, secondary, or exploratory endpoint in 15, 31 and 4 trials respectively, being the single primary in six. Statistically significant results on one or more QOL items favouring the intervention group were found in 18 trials. Eleven of these used a complete multidimensional measure. Adjustments for multiple testing when using multicomponent QOL measures were not reported. Nine trials (18%) defined a statistically or clinically significant difference for QOL, five with QOL as a primary outcome, and four with QOL as a secondary outcome. Correlation statistics with other study outcomes were rarely performed. PROMs including QOL are important endpoints in cachexia trials. We recommend using well-validated QOL measures, including cachexia-specific items such as weight history, appetite loss, and nutritional intake. Appropriate statistical methods with definitions of clinical significance, adjustment for multiple testing and few co-primary endpoints are encouraged, as is an understanding of how interventions may relate to changes in QOL endpoints. A strategic and scientific-based approach to PROM research in cachexia trials is warranted, to improve the research base in this field and avoid the use of QOL as supplementary measures.

Physical function endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 1 of the cachexia endpoints series.

In cancer cachexia trials, measures of physical function are commonly used as endpoints. For drug trials to obtain regulatory approval, efficacy in physical function endpoints may be needed alongside other measures. However, it is not clear which physical function endpoints should be used. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the frequency and diversity of physical function endpoints in cancer cachexia trials. Following a comprehensive electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane (1990-2021), records were retrieved. Eligible trials met the following criteria: adults (≥18 years), controlled design, more than 40 participants, use of a cachexia intervention for more than 14 days and use of a physical function endpoint. Physical function measures were classified as an objective measure (hand grip strength [HGS], stair climb power [SCP], timed up and go [TUG] test, 6-min walking test [6MWT] and short physical performance battery [SPPB]), clinician assessment of function (Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS] or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status [ECOG-PS]) or patient-reported outcomes (physical function subscale of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires [EORTC QLQ-C30 or C15]). Data extraction was performed using Covidence and followed PRISMA guidance (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022276710). A total of 5975 potential studies were examined and 71 were eligible. Pharmacological interventions were assessed in 38 trials (54%). Of these, 11 (29%, n = 1184) examined megestrol and 5 (13%, n = 1928) examined anamorelin; nutritional interventions were assessed in 21 trials (30%); and exercise-based interventions were assessed in 6 trials (8%). The remaining six trials (8%) assessed multimodal interventions. Among the objective measures of physical function (assessed as primary or secondary endpoints), HGS was most commonly examined (33 trials, n = 5081) and demonstrated a statistically significant finding in 12 (36%) trials (n = 2091). The 6MWT was assessed in 12 trials (n = 1074) and was statistically significant in 4 (33%) trials (n = 403), whereas SCP, TUG and SPPB were each assessed in 3 trials. KPS was more commonly assessed than the newer ECOG-PS (16 vs. 9 trials), and patient-reported EORTC QLQ-C30 physical function was reported in 25 trials. HGS is the most commonly used physical function endpoint in cancer cachexia clinical trials. However, heterogeneity in study design, populations, intervention and endpoint selection make it difficult to comment on the optimal endpoint and how to measure this. We offer several recommendations/considerations to improve the design of future clinical trials in cancer cachexia.

Are CT-Derived Muscle Measurements Prognostic, Independent of Systemic Inflammation, in Good Performance Status Patients with Advanced Cancer?

The present study examined the relationships between CT-derived muscle measurements, systemic inflammation, and survival in advanced cancer patients with good performance status (ECOG-PS 0/1). Data was collected prospectively from patients with advanced cancer undergoing anti-cancer therapy with palliative intent. The CT Sarcopenia score (CT-SS) was calculated by combining the CT-derived skeletal muscle index (SMI) and density (SMD). The systemic inflammatory status was determined using the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS). The primary outcome of interest was overall survival (OS). Univariate and multivariate Cox regressions were used for survival analysis. Three hundred and seven patients met the inclusion criteria, out of which 62% (n = 109) were male and 47% (n = 144) were ≥65 years of age, while 38% (n = 118) were CT-SS ≥ 1 and 47% (n = 112) of patients with pre-study blood were inflamed (mGPS ≥ 1). The median survival from entry to the study was 11.1 months (1-68.1). On univariate analysis, cancer type (p < 0.05) and mGPS (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with OS. On multivariate analysis, only mGPS (p < 0.001) remained significantly associated with OS. In patients who were ECOG-PS 0, mGPS was significantly associated with CT-SS (p < 0.05). mGPS may dominate the prognostic value of CT-derived sarcopenia in good-performance-status patients with advanced cancer.

Lactate dehydrogenase: relationship with the diagnostic GLIM criterion for cachexia in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although suggestive of dysregulated metabolism, the relationship between serum LDH level, phenotypic/aetiologic diagnostic Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and survival in patients with advanced cancer has yet to examined. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from patients with advanced cancer, undergoing anti-cancer therapy with palliative intent, across nine sites in the UK and Ireland between 2011-2016, was retrospectively analysed. LDH values were grouped as <250/250-500/>500 Units/L. Relationships were examined using χ2 test for linear-by-linear association and binary logistics regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 436 patients met the inclusion criteria. 46% (n = 200) were male and 59% (n = 259) were ≥65 years of age. The median serum LDH was 394 Units/L and 33.5% (n = 146) had an LDH > 500 Units/L. LDH was significantly associated with ECOG-PS (p < 0.001), NLR (p < 0.05), mGPS (p < 0.05) and 3-month survival (p < 0.001). LDH was significantly associated with 3-month survival independent of weight loss (p < 0.01), BMI (p < 0.05), skeletal muscle mass (p < 0.01), metastatic disease (p < 0.05), NLR (p < 0.05) and mGPS (p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: LDH was associated with performance status, systemic inflammation and survival in patients with advanced cancer. LDH measurement may be considered as an aetiologic criteria and become a potential therapeutic target in the treatment of cancer cachexia.

The Value of In Vivo Reflectance Confocal Microscopy as an Assessment Tool in Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of standardized objective and reliable assessment tools for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) imaging offers a non-invasive method to identify peripheral neuropathy markers, namely Meissner's corpuscles (MC). This study investigated the feasibility and value of RCM in CIPN. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Reflectance confocal microscopy was performed on the fingertip to evaluate MC density in 45 healthy controls and 9 patients with cancer (prior, during, and post-chemotherapy). Quantification was completed by 2 reviewers (one blinded), with maximum MC count/3 × 3 mm image reported. Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST; thermal and mechanical detection thresholds), Grooved pegboard test, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMS) were conducted for comparison. RESULTS: In controls (25 females, 20 males; 24-81 years), females exhibited greater mean MC density compared with males (49.9 ± 7.1 vs 30.9 ± 4.2 MC/3 × 3 mm; P = .03). Differences existed across age by decade (P < .0001). Meissner's corpuscle density was correlated with mechanical detection (ρ = -0.51), warm detection (ρ = -0.47), cold pain (ρ = 0.49) thresholds (P < .01); and completion time on the Grooved pegboard test in both hands (P ≤ .02). At baseline, patients had reduced MC density vs age and gender-matched controls (P = .03). Longitudinal assessment of MC density revealed significant relationships with QST and PROMS. Inter-rater reliability of MC count showed an intraclass correlation of 0.96 (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the clinical utility of RCM in CIPN as it provides meaningful markers of sensory nerve dysfunction. Novel, prospective assessment demonstrated the ability to detect subclinical deficits in patients at risk of CIPN and potential to monitor neuropathy progression.

A randomized, feasibility trial of an exercise and nutrition-based rehabilitation programme (ENeRgy) in people with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite rehabilitation being increasingly advocated for people living with incurable cancer, there is limited evidence supporting efficacy or component parts. The progressive decline in function and nutritional in this population would support an approach that targets these factors. This trial aimed to assess the feasibility of an exercise and nutrition based rehabilitation programme in people with incurable cancer. METHODS: We randomized community dwelling adults with incurable cancer to either a personalized exercise and nutrition based programme (experimental arm) or standard care (control arm) for 8 weeks. Endpoints included feasibility, quality of life, physical activity (step count), and body weight. Qualitative and health economic analyses were also included. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were recruited (23 experimental arm, 22 control arm). There were 26 men (58%), and the median age was 78 years (IQR 69-84). At baseline, the median BMI was 26 kg/m2 (IQR: 22-29), and median weight loss in the previous 6 months was 5% (IQR: -12% to 0%). Adherence to the experimental arm was >80% in 16/21 (76%) patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the following between trial arms: step count - median % change from baseline to endpoint, per trial arm (experimental -18.5% [IQR: -61 to 65], control 5% [IQR: -32 to 50], P = 0.548); weight - median % change from baseline to endpoint, per trial arm (experimental 1%[IQR: -3 to 3], control -0.5% [IQR: -3 to 1], P = 0.184); overall quality of life - median % change from baseline to endpoint, per trial arm (experimental 0% [IQR: -20 to 19], control 0% [IQR: -23 to 33], P = 0.846). Qualitative findings observed themes of capability, opportunity, and motivation amongst patients in the experimental arm. The mean incremental cost of the experimental arm versus control was £-319.51 [CI -7593.53 to 6581.91], suggesting the experimental arm was less costly. CONCLUSIONS: An exercise and nutritional rehabilitation intervention is feasible and has potential benefits for people with incurable cancer. A larger trial is now warranted to test the efficacy of this approach.

The Emerging Role of Interleukin 1ß (IL-1ß) in Cancer Cachexia.

Treatment of cancer cachexia remains an unmet need. The host-tumour interface and the resulting sequestration of the pro-inflammatory cytokine Il-1ß is critical in cachexia development. Neuroinflammation mediated via IL-1ß through the hypothalamic pituitary axis results in increased muscle proteolysis and adipose lipolysis, thus creating a prolonged stress-like environment with loss of appetite and increased resting energy expenditure. Recent trials using a monoclonal antibody targeting IL-1ß, canakinumab, have shown a potential role in lung cancer; however, a potential role of targeting IL-1ß to treat cachexia in patients with lung cancer is unclear, yet the underlying pathophysiology provides a sound rationale that this may be a viable therapeutic approach.

Intention-to-Treat Analyses for Randomized Controlled Trials in Hospice/Palliative Care: The Case for Analyses to be of People Exposed to the Intervention.

CONTEXT: Minimizing bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) includes intention-to-treat analyses. Hospice/palliative care RCTs are constrained by high attrition unpredictable when consenting, including withdrawals between randomization and first exposure to the intervention. Such withdrawals may systematically bias findings away from the new intervention being evaluated if they are considered nonresponders. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to quantify the impact within intention-to-treat principles. METHODS: A theoretical model was developed to assess the impact of withdrawals between randomization and first exposure on study power and effect sizes. Ten reported hospice/palliative care studies had power recalculated accounting for such withdrawal. RESULTS: In the theoretical model, when 5% of withdrawals occurred between randomization and first exposure to the intervention, change in power was demonstrated in binary outcomes (2.0%-2.2%), continuous outcomes (0.8%-2.0%), and time-to-event outcomes (1.6%-2.0%), and odds ratios were changed by 0.06-0.17. Greater power loss was observed with larger effect sizes. Withdrawal rates were 0.9%-10% in the 10 reported RCTs, corresponding to power losses of 0.1%-2.2%. For studies with binary outcomes, withdrawal rates were 0.3%-1.2% changing odds ratios by 0.01-0.22. CONCLUSION: If blinding is maintained and all interventions are available simultaneously, our model suggests that excluding data from withdrawals between randomization and first exposure to the intervention minimizes one bias. This is the safety population as defined by the International Committee on Harmonization. When planning for future trials, minimizing the time between randomization and first exposure to the intervention will minimize the problem. Power should be calculated on people who receive the intervention.

Meaningful measures in cancer cachexia: implications for practice and research.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cancer cachexia is a complex inflammatory syndrome, which presents with a variety of discrete symptoms and signs. This creates a challenge for both clinicians and researchers in recognizing and assessing the syndrome. This review explores the evidence for various measures used in the assessment of cachexia. RECENT FINDINGS: Objectively, cachexia may be assessed using CT-derived measures of skeletal muscle [skeletal muscle index (SMI) and skeletal muscle density (SMD)]. Evidence suggests that SMD may be of equal or greater value than SMI in assessing cachexia. Inflammatory markers are also used, and include interleukin(IL)-1α; IL-1ß; IL-6 and Interferon Gamma (IFNγ). Other robust measures include performance status and the modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS). These measures, however, are more commonly used in academia. By comparison, clinical assessment is limited to individual measures of patient function, such as hand grip strength (HGS), calf circumference, gait speed, and the 'timed up and go test' (TUG). These have each been linked with components of cachexia but are less well evidenced. Evidence also exists for patient-reported quality-of-life measures, based upon the EORTC- QLQ-C30 questionnaire, in assessing cachexia. SUMMARY: Further assessment is required to compare clinical measures of cachexia and determine their utility.

Relief of Neuropathic Pain Through Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibition: A Randomized Proof-of-Concept Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Case reports and a case series have described relief of neuropathic pain (NP) after treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFR-Is). These observations are supported by preclinical findings. The aim of this trial was to explore a potential clinical signal supporting the therapeutic efficacy of EGFR-Is in NP. METHODS: In a proof-of-concept trial using a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, 14 patients with severe, chronic, therapy-resistant NP due to compressed peripheral nerves or complex regional pain syndrome were randomized to receive a single infusion of the EGFR-I cetuximab and placebo in crossover design, followed by a single open-label cetuximab infusion. RESULTS: The mean reduction in daily average pain scores three to seven days after single-blinded cetuximab infusion was 1.73 points (90% confidence interval [CI] = 0.80 to 2.66), conferring a 1.22-point greater reduction than placebo (90% CI = -0.10 to 2.54). Exploratory analyses suggested that pain reduction might be greater in the 14 days after treatment with blinded cetuximab than after placebo. The proportion of patients who reported ≥50% reduction in average pain three to seven days after cetuximab was 36% (14% after placebo), and comparison of overall pain reduction suggests a trend in favor of cetuximab. Skin rash (grade 1-2) was the most frequent side effect (12/14, 86%). CONCLUSIONS: This small proof-of-concept evaluation of an EGFR-I against NP did not provide statistical evidence of efficacy. However, substantial reductions in pain were reported, and confidence intervals do not rule out a clinically meaningful treatment effect. Evaluation of EGFR-I against NP therefore warrants further investigation.

A systematic review examining clinical markers and biomarkers of analgesic response to radiotherapy for cancer-induced bone pain.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer frequently spreads to bone, causing cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) which affects quality of life. The best treatment is radiotherapy (XRT), but response is variable. The aim of this systematic review was to identify factors that predict analgesic response. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using PRISMA guidelines, Medline (1946-2018), Embase Classic + Embase (1947-2018) and Cochrane (setup-2018) databases were searched. Eligible studies examined adult patients receiving external beam XRT for CIBP with clinical marker and/or biomarkers evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies (n = 4490) were included: Urinary markers in three studies (n = 357), genomic biomarkers in one study (n = 107), imaging techniques in five studies (n = 231) and demographics and disease parameters in eight studies (n = 4572). Quantitative sensory testing (n = 23) and physical activity and/or gait (n = 42) have been examined in one study each, while two studies have evaluated grade of spinal instability (n = 276). CONCLUSION: No predictors of analgesic response from XRT in CIBP were identified but several show promise.

The Management of Opioid-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are the foundation of treatment for cancer pain but can cause side-effects, one of the most common being nausea and vomiting, which can impair quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence for the management of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting. This systematic review was undertaken as part of an update of the European Association for Palliative Care's opioid guidelines. DESIGN: Searches of MEDLINE (1966-2017) and EMBASE (1980-2017) were done. Key eligibility criteria were: randomized controlled trials conducted in patients with cancer. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluations system was applied to formulate recommendations. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were eligible (1524 patients). The studies were grouped as follows: opioid switching (n = 8); the use of antiemetics to treat opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (n = 4); and change of route of administration of the opioid (n = 3). Three recommendations were formulated: A weak recommendation for switching from morphine to oxycodone in cancer patients with nausea (quality D); a weak recommendation for switching from tramadol to either codeine or hydrocodone for pain in cancer patients with nausea (quality D); and a weak recommendation for switching from morphine/oxycodone to methadone using the three-day switch method in patients with increasing pain considered untreatable with further opioid titration and/or with opioid-related side effects (quality C). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review can make only weak recommendations for the management of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting. There remains a need for high-quality studies before strong recommendations on the management of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting can be made.

Results of a Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of Nabiximols Oromucosal Spray as an Adjunctive Therapy in Advanced Cancer Patients with Chronic Uncontrolled Pain.

CONTEXT: Prior Phase 2/3 studies found that cannabinoids might provide adjunctive analgesia in advanced cancer patients with uncontrolled pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess adjunctive nabiximols (Sativex®), an extract of Cannabis sativa containing two potentially therapeutic cannabinoids (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol [27 mg/mL] and cannabidiol [25 mg/mL]), in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy. METHODS: Phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in patients with advanced cancer and average pain Numerical Rating Scale scores ≥4 and ≤8 despite optimized opioid therapy. Patients randomized to nabiximols (n = 199) or placebo (n = 198) self-titrated study medications over a two-week period, followed by a three-week treatment period at the titrated dose. RESULTS: Median percent improvements in average pain Numerical Rating Scale score from baseline to end of treatment in the nabiximols and placebo groups were 10.7% vs. 4.5% (P = 0.0854) in the intention-to-treat population (primary variable) and 15.5% vs. 6.3% (P = 0.0378) in the per-protocol population. Nabiximols was statistically superior to placebo on two of three quality-of-life instruments at Week 3 and on all three at Week 5. In exploratory post hoc analyses, U.S. patients, but not patients from the rest of the world, experienced significant benefits from nabiximols on multiple secondary endpoints. Possible contributing factors to differences in nabiximols efficacy include: 1) the U.S. participants received lower doses of opioids at baseline than the rest of the world and 2) the subgroups had different distribution of cancer pain types, which may have been related to differences in pathophysiology of pain. The safety profile of nabiximols was consistent with earlier studies. CONCLUSIONS: Although not superior to placebo on the primary efficacy endpoint, nabiximols had benefits on multiple secondary endpoints, particularly in the U.S. PATIENTS: Nabiximols might have utility in patients with advanced cancer who receive a lower opioid dose, such as individuals with early intolerance to opioid therapy.

Sativex oromucosal spray as adjunctive therapy in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy: two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are critical for managing cancer pain, but may provide inadequate relief and/or unacceptable side effects in some cases. OBJECTIVE: To assess the analgesic efficacy of adjunctive Sativex (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (27 mg/mL): cannabidiol (25 mg/mL)) in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy. METHODS: This report describes two phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Eligible patients had advanced cancer and average pain numerical rating scale (NRS) scores ≥4 and ≤8 at baseline, despite optimized opioid therapy. In Study-1, patients were randomized to Sativex or placebo, and then self-titrated study medications over a 2-week period per effect and tolerability, followed by a 3-week treatment period. In Study-2, all patients self-titrated Sativex over a 2-week period. Patients with a ≥15% improvement from baseline in pain score were then randomized 1:1 to Sativex or placebo, followed by 5-week treatment period (randomized withdrawal design). RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint (percent improvement (Study-1) and mean change (Study-2) in average daily pain NRS scores) was not met in either study. Post hoc analyses of the primary endpoints identified statistically favourable treatment effect for Sativex in US patients <65 years (median treatment difference: 8.8; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.00-17.95; p = 0.040) that was not observed in patients <65 years from the rest of the world (median treatment difference: 0.2; 95% CI: -5.00 to 7.74; p = 0.794). Treatment effect in favour of Sativex was observed on quality-of-life questionnaires, despite the fact that similar effects were not observed on NRS score. The safety profile of Sativex was consistent with earlier studies, and no evidence of abuse or misuse was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Sativex did not demonstrate superiority to placebo in reducing self-reported pain NRS scores in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy, although further exploration of differences between United States and patients from the rest of the world is warranted.

Prognostic Tools in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: In 2005, the European Association for Palliative Care made recommendations for prognostic markers in advanced cancer. Since then, prognostic tools have been developed, evolved, and validated. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the progress in the development and validation of prognostic tools. METHODS: Medline, Embase Classic and Embase were searched. Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with incurable cancer, >18 years, original studies, population n ≥100, and published after 2003. Descriptive and quantitative statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Forty-nine studies were eligible, assessing seven prognostic tools across different care settings, primary cancer types, and statistically assessed survival prediction. The Palliative Performance Scale was the most studied (n = 21,082), comprising six parameters (six subjective), was externally validated, and predicted survival. The Palliative Prognostic Score composed of six parameters (four subjective and two objective), the Palliative Prognostic Index composed of nine parameters (nine subjective), and the Glasgow Prognostic Score composed of two parameters (two objective) and were all externally validated in more than 2000 patients with advanced cancer and predicted survival. CONCLUSION: Various prognostic tools have been validated but vary in their complexity, subjectivity, and therefore clinical utility. The Glasgow Prognostic Score would seem the most favorable as it uses only two parameters (both objective) and has prognostic value complementary to the gold standard measure, which is performance status. Further studies comparing all proved prognostic markers in a single cohort of patients with advanced cancer are needed to determine the optimal prognostic tool.

The use of opioids in cancer patients with renal impairment-a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Opioids are recommended for moderate to severe cancer pain; however, in patients with cancer, impaired renal function can affect opioid metabolism. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence for the use of opioids in cancer patients with renal impairment. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted and the following databases were searched: MEDLINE (1966 to 2015), EMBASE (1980 2015) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (up to 2015). Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with cancer pain taking an opioid (defined as per the WHO ladder); >18 years; renal impairment (serum creatinine > normal range (study dependent), creatinine clearance (CrCl) or glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurements <90 ml/min, or as per the study definition); clinical outcome related to renal impairment. All eligible studies were appraised using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system. RESULTS: Eighteen studies (n = 2422) were eligible but heterogeneity meant meta-analysis was not possible. Morphine was examined in eight studies (n = 1418), oxycodone in two studies (n = 325), and fentanyl, alfentanil or sufentanil were discussed in six studies in total (n = 442). No recommendations could be formulated on the preferred opioid in patients with renal impairment. CONCLUSION: There is lack of consensus within the existing literature on the relationship between morphine, creatinine levels and morphine-related side effects. Based on the current evidence, morphine should be used with caution; however, more evidence is needed. Fentanyl, alfentanil and sufentanil are recommended in patients with renal impairment based on pharmacokinetics and clinical experience. However, the present systematic review found very little clinical evidence for this. Overall, the quality of the existing evidence on opioid treatment in cancer patients with renal impairment is low. There remains a need for high-quality clinical studies examining opioids in patients with renal impairment.

Symptom Control Trials in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

CONTEXT: Symptom control research in patients with advanced cancer is not common. This may be the result of a belief that this research is unethical, not practical, or that patients are not interested. However, the experiences of cancer patients who have actually taken part in symptom control research near the end of life have never been detailed. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to explore the experiences of patients with advanced cancer who had taken part in symptom control trials. METHODS: A prospective two-center study was undertaken using grounded theory methodology. Theoretical sampling was used to recruit patients from one of two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials studying novel analgesic agents for cancer-related pain. Participants completed one semistructured interview. Recruitment and interviewing continued until data saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Twenty-one participants were recruited. Fifteen (71%) were male, with a mean age of 62 years. Key themes identified included reasons for trial participation, participants' interactions with the trial staff, and participants' responses to the effect the trial had on their pain. In general, participants regarded taking part in a clinical trial as a positive experience, and potentially improving overall well-being. Crucially, this was not related to whether there had been an improvement in symptoms. CONCLUSION: The findings provide grounds for optimism that patients with advanced cancer may benefit from taking part in symptom control trials, supporting the paradigm that participation in symptom control research should be encouraged in this population.